EN: The purpose of our paper is to study manifestations of censorship and self-censorship in Paul Miclău’s journal written and initially translated during the period of communist totalitarianism in Romania. This journal has had a fascinating story. It was written in French in 1985. In order for it to be published under the communist regime in 1989, the author self-translated it into Romanian and censored it. The uncensored Romanian version appeared later, in 1994, and the original French version was printed in France in 1995. Miclău explains that repressive censorship contributed to diminishing his authority as the author of his work. On his own initiative or on the advice of others, he had to suppress words or passages of variable length from the original text so that his work could be published. Censorship concealed political, social, economic, religious or sexual realities through attenuation, deletion of words and expressions, even the cutting of entire paragraphs. Comparing the original French and uncensored Romanian text with the first Romanian self-translation reveals that Paul Miclău’s journal was no longer the unique product of his literary self-expression, rather it had been rewritten in light of the censorial context that allowed it to be published. Yet, his personal stamp had not been obliterated.

Abstract EN: This paper looks at self-censorship and censorship in Bushido: The Soul of Japan (1900) by Nitobe, Inazo (1862-1933) as well as in four different translations of the book. In Bushido, probably the best known of Nitobe’s books, the renowned Japanese writer and diplomat tried to act as an inter-cultural mediator between East and West and export the concepts and values of Bushido (the path of the samurai). Nitobe was descended from one of the great samurai families, but he converted to Christianity, married an American Quaker from Philadelphia and studied widely in the US and in Europe. Bushido was a valiant attempt to “translate” the ethical code of the samurais for the West, but perhaps in so doing Nitobe idealized the samurai caste by domesticating their values and teaching in order to bring them closer to Christian values and teaching. The main purpose of his book was to make Japanese culture acceptable to and valued by the West and in particular Philadelphia at the beginning of the 20th century, but he also had to assure the approval of the imperial authorities.The original text was written in English, which was not Nitobe’s mother tongue, and it can be studied as a self-translation that involves self-censorship. Writing in a foreign language obliges one to “filter” one’s own emotions and modes of expression. To a certain extent, it also limits one’s capacity for self-expression. Alternatively, it allows the writer to express more empathy for the “other culture.” Furthermore, one is much more conscious of what one wants to say, or what one wishes to avoid saying, in order to make the work more acceptable for intended readers.The four translations are the Spanish translation by Gonzalo Jiménez de la Espada (1909), the French translation by Charles Jacob (1927), the Japanese translation by Yanaihara Tadao (1938) and the Spanish translation by General José Millán-Astray (1941). A descriptive, diachronic study of the translation of selected cultural references shows the four translations to be good examples of the way translations vary over time. They also illustrate the relationship between context, pretext and text (Widowson, 2004) and the visibility or invisibility of the translator (Venuti, 1995). We have also found it useful to draw on skopos theory, as well as some aspects of the Manipulation School, in particular ideology, censorship and the emphasis on translation between distant languages and cultures.The analysis of the four translations shows that censorship of cultural references is evident during periods of conflict (such as the Japanese translation of 1938 and the Spanish translation of 1941). We hope to show that the context/pretext of the translator led to such manipulative or censorial translation decisions that Nitobe’s skopos was lost in at least one of the translations.

Abstract EN: Translations of Arabic literature into Hebrew have been marginally present in Israeli Jewish culture for the last 62 years. Their production and reception have been affected by the ongoing political Jewish-Arab conflict which depicts the Arab as a threatening enemy and inferior to the Jew. This depiction has often led to fear and apprehension of Arabic literary works. The present paper focuses on several cases where Hebrew translations of Arabic prose and poetry were publicly condemned as a potential threat to the stability of Israeli Jewish sociopolitical creeds and state security. The various sanctions imposed on the texts and their writers (though not on their translators!) by Israeli authorities, the Israeli Hebrew press and public opinion are described and explained. These sanctions were subsequently lifted after Israeli Jewish writers rose up against censure and censorship by raising their voices in protest.

EN: An emblematic figure of the Arab renaissance in the nineteenth century, the translator, teacher and essayist al-TahTāwī (1801-1873) wrote a travelogue and a description of Paris (1826-1831) that convincingly illustrate the relation that binds translation and travel writing as an undertaking in the representation of the Other. One of a group of students enrolled in the modernisation programme launched by the khedive MuHammad ‘Alī, al-TahTāwī set out, in his travel writing, to paint a detailed portrait of the political and cultural life of France, and more specifically Paris, during the early decades of the nineteenth century. Our purpose is two-fold. First, we outline the development of this representation and the encyclopaedic project that involve a selection of facts to report, texts to translate and translation strategies to retain. Second, we examine the degree to which the translator’s preventive self-censorship, dictated by socio-cultural and political factors, played a significant role in this undertaking and was used to promote the acceptance of the Other. Beyond the contribution to history that this work represents—Egypt opening its doors to Europe and Liberal and Orientalist movements in France—, the syncretism effort that it evokes, and that is subjected to self-censorship and textual rewriting in keeping with various constraints (Lefevere, 1992), turns out to be particularly pertinent during a period when it is good form to talk in terms of “clash of civilizations.”

Abstract EN: Understanding literary translation as part of a power game has led to renewed interest in issues of censorship in translation. In an effort to untangle the intricate relations between formal law and (internalized) norms, this essay will focus on voluntary or self-imposed censorship in areas where formal censorship (i.e., legislated law, religious law) is not strictly enforced. It will first briefly describe certain aspects of formal censorship in Israel, then present cases in which the borderline between formal censorship and self-censorship seems blurred. Two particular cases will be examined: one has to do with the attitude of translators towards the use of the words “pig and pork,” the other with the Committee established by the Ministry of Education in the 1960s to censor obscenity in literature. These cases will help shed light on the deep roots of self-censorship mechanisms and the reduced need for formal censorship when subordinate groups or individuals feel that working with the consensus is more beneficial than working against it. The case of a book banned in the Orthodox community—and therefore pre-censored for translation—will examine another aspect of censorship, that of the corrective measures applied when voluntary self-censorship is not exercised.

EN: This article deals with censorship in a country about which Translation Studies scholars have written little: Saudi Arabia. It proposes first to introduce briefly the sociopolitical situation of the country and then to give a synthetic overview of the media landscape (radio and television). In order to better understand the state of censorship in the Saudi media, the author presents a case study based on his work some ten years ago at the French radio section of the Saudi Ministry of Information, and gives a first-hand account of his experience in the foreign languages television channel of the same Ministry. Finally, the author concludes with a postcolonial reflection on the relation between ethics, censorship and translation.

EN: In 1717, Alain-René Lesage published a prose adaptation of Matteo Maria Boiardo’s Italian poem, entitled Orlando innamorato, under the title Roland l’Amoureux. In the Preface to his Roland l’Amoureux [Orlando in Love], Lesage explains that his translation reflects the needs and tastes of his time. So, for example, in order to adapt the Italian poem to the rules of verisimilitude and propriety, Lesage modifies the original dispositio and inventio: he introduces more coherence in the narration, he eliminates all that was too irrational and fantastic, he employs a polite language, he describes well-mannered and respectful behaviours, he changes several of the episodes to show his devotion towards royalty, and he transforms many adventures with the purpose of respecting the concept, very important during his time, of the search for happiness. Lesage’s work can be considered successful: it has been read throughout the 18th century and has been the subject of eight new editions until 1793. Even if Lesage has not reproduced the musicality of the ottava rima and the rhythm of the original, he has offered to French readers the possibility to know Boiardo’s work and to appreciate his ars imaginativa. Being short, clear and logical, Lesage’s translation can be read without too much difficulty and provides very interesting and “riveting moments” to lovers of adventure novels. Lesage’s adaptation retains its importance into our time by serving as an indicator of the public’s tastes during the 18th century, as well as of the moral and artistic inclinations of Lesage himself.